In reply to:

---

There's a difference between the inane blethering and bleating about stuff that happened here ages ago that only you remember that makes up, oh, let's say a bad 40% of your posts, and this sort of automobile accident entertainment.

---

No, there's not. That's the whole point. In both cases, we're talking about the same thing: Stu being Stu. Do you understand? I'll say it a third time: two weeks ago, when I told you you ought to look into the history of Stu and his dossier - not for any sort of 'education' but because I thought you'd find it amusing - you shot back with your holier-than-thou bitchy attitude. Now, two weeks later, you're openly asking people to PM you the history of Stu and his dossier. Don't you find that funny? I sure do. And as you've said yourself, humor is in the eye - or ear - of the beholder.

In reply to:

---

I had you pegged as the kind of pothead pighead slaphead nebbish who got off on throwing his weight around on the Internet and trying to bully females to do your bidding, but this is feeble even by your standards.

---

You're basing that on what now? Nothing? Calling you on your copious bullshit rather than rolling over in the face of your non-existant logic and unprovoked shit-slinging? I'm sure it makes you feel better to extrapolate misogyny on my part from my treating you as I would any other senseless doof, but it just doesn't add up; it's just an easy way for you to demonize those who disagree with your idiocy.

In reply to:

---

Could you just not ignore posts from me in your search results? Or is that too much for your brain to process?

---

Again, you're not too keen on picking up jokes.


...then I rose, wipin' the blunt's ash from my clothes and froze only to blow the herb smoke through my nose....